About your Search

20121202
20121210
STATION
CNNW 13
MSNBCW 12
CSPAN2 9
CNN 7
CSPAN 6
KQED (PBS) 6
FBC 5
KPIX (CBS) 3
MSNBC 3
CNBC 2
KQEH (PBS) 2
KRCB (PBS) 2
KGO (ABC) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 95
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 95 (some duplicates have been removed)
to make sure that the wealthiest in this country help pay down this large deficit. >> will the democrats just wait? >> we have a lot of discussions going on in the senate and the various places. we know what the parameters are and the speaker knows what the parameters are. the president is ready, willing, and able to sit down and seriously negotiate with us but they have to be willing to come to the table with specifics like he is doing. >> we have done something. if you look at either proposal, they want every tax rate to go up. we all agree that group of rates should not go up. we just disagree on the top 2%. let's go where we agree which would be the current rates and make sure the folks in the middle class don't have an increase. we all agree on that. but they want more and more. we are saying that you have to start somewhere. they don't want to use the procedure to allow their own people to vote on it. they are holding the american people, the middle-class hostage for small issues they want to fight on and play the press war. we agree on these rates to be lower. we just disagree on
to prosperity or to cut our way out of this deficit problem that we have. we're going to need more revenues. in order to do that, that starts with higher rates for the folks at the top. >> reporter: the president did say today he would consider lowering rates again for the top two percent next year as part of a broader tax overhaul. the house republican plan envisions $2.2 trillion in deficit reductions over the next decade. $800 billion would come from new revenues but with no hike in tax rates for top earners. instead the plan relies on $1.2 trillion in reduced spending including $600 billion from changes in medicare and medicaid. at the white house today, the president met with a bipartisan group of governors pressing his own plan for deficit reduction. that proposal, $1.6 trillion in revenue from tax increases on the wealthy and $600 billion in spending cuts mostly from reductions in medicare. he also wants authority to raise the debt ceiling without congressional intervention. but governors emerged afterwards treading a line between the two sides. delaware governor jack markel, a democ
it in building a good, solid farm bill which actually found $23 billion in savings towards the deficit. we did it in passing a strong highway bill that will strengthen our nation's infrastructure. and we did it most recently this week in working through a large and complex defense authorization bill that will keep our nation safer and more secure in these perilous times. it will take more of this kind of cooperation and consensus building to address the very real and substantial challenges facing our nation today. that is why i'm deeply concerned about a proposal floated recently by some members of the majority regarding the rules of the senate. they propose to change the nearly 100-year-old senate rule that requires a two-thirds majority to change the operating rules of the senate. our colleagues in the majority are proposing to use a simple majority vote to make the change. that's the issue here. the issue is the manner in which they plan to do it. once the precedent of changing a rule with a simple majority vote is established, 51 senators could change the rules to suit their own convenienc
with the president and other ceo's to discuss the impending crisis. we even published their own study on the deficit, copies of which are available here today. we look forward to continuing this conversation, keeping the dialogue on going for the next month is critical if we're going to solve this problem -- and we think our panel will be very enlightening in terms of what the issues are. so, al, with that i will turn it over to you and the panel. we look forward to reproductive hour. thank you very much. >> can everybody hear? i welcome you all to bgov -- if you do not know as much about it as you want, i invite you to stay, because it really is a fabulous place. we do have an all-star panel. i will start with my left, which is where bob corker says i always start. tim pawlenty, former governor of minnesota. i wrote that i thought that if he could get the nomination he would have been the strongest republican presidential candidate. i was absolutely right -- we just could not figure out how to get there from here. tim is now the head of the financial services round table, a job he took just about a
. the deficit is not the biggest problem in the country. the deficit is shrinking by hundreds of millions of dollars every year the president has been in office. to the extent we need to use debt to accomplish other goals, you may not like the idea in the abstract, but debt is cheaper now than it has been in a long time. focusing on the deficit is like arguing about the color you might paint your car while you're crashing that car into a tree. in washington the republicans are arguing about not a pretend problem but something that's a secondary problem. a problem that has no need to be the one problem we wreck everything else to solve. if you look at the real economy in the real world, outside of t stuff already think we're not growing enough to get back to a healthy economy. they cut the estimate to how much we are growing. people are not making enough money and therefore, not spending enough money and businesses are not hiring enough people. we need to be talking about growth. the problem in the country is an economic growth problem. the deficit, nobody wants there to be a deficit, but
times." so far in fiscal year 2013, the government notching up a $172 billion deficit in november a lawn. jams is joining us from orlando, florida on the democrats' line. caller: i think the number one priority is the people, and i think he will do a good job. people should give him more credit and let him do what he is doing. it will take time. i think he has a lot on his hands to deal with now. host: if you get through, turn the volume down on the tv set. this is from "to the new york times." our question -- what should be the president's number one agenda. next up is christine from new york city on the independent line. caller: good morning. i believe the president will not be able to accomplish his agenda without doing something that i believe is supported by the majority of the american people, that is the critical need for campaign finance reform to restore us to democracy that the people are represented at intergovernment instead of special interests. if we got campaign finance reform enacted, i know john mccain wanted it and a lot of other people -- we could then move on to do wh
of payments deficit remains petroleum, and to increase our g.d.p. by the maximization of these activities in the united states rather than exporting our dollars abroad. so thank you very much and i think we can sit down now or -- yeah. >> thank you. give us a moment to take our seats. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, our panel discussion is about to begin, featuring senator lamar alexander, senator roy blunt, and our moderator, christine romans. >> can you hear me now? there we go. good morning, rn. -- all right. so i'm a lazy moderator. i've warned everyone. we want to get the ball rolling and talk about this report, talk about the future of energy in this country, and the future of transportation and america's national security with regards to energy. but i want to make sure that all of you know to please jump in. i don't want to ask a question and then ask another question. i want this to be a discussion, and i'll steer it. everyone agree? do we all agree? wonderful. let me start first with fred. nice to see you again. >> good to see you. >> you've heard the findings of the report,
for a deficit deal, president obama pressed his case at the home of a middle class family in virginia today, part of his pitch to extend tax cuts for all but the very wealthy. good evening, i'm jeffrey brown. >> woodruff: and i'm judy woodruff. on the "newshour" tonight, we update the state of the negotiations and examine the push to make changes to social security and medicare. >> brown: then, margaret warner looks at the political strife in egypt, after deadly clashes in the streets and resignations by top officials. >> woodruff: we have a battleground dispatch from a coastal city facing rising sea levels and the next big storm. >> if sandy were to come close r directly into norfolk i think we'd all be in big trouble. >> brown: we assess the latest diplomatic moves to end syria's war, as secretary of state hillary clinton meets with russia's foreign minister. >> woodruff: and ray suarez has the story of a program that aims to put students at low-achieving schools on a path to high school graduation. >> we're here to make things better. we're here to tutor kids. we're here to make sure tha
who actually came up with a plan to cut the deficit, a plan that everyone hailed as magnificent but no one wanted to adopt. >>> joining me now is cnn contributor will cain. he leans right. good morning, will. >> good morning. let me tell you something. you said the popularity of gangnam style knows no limits. i beg to differ. >> you do? >> i think we just found its limits, when 8-year-olds start doing gangnam style you can count on its popularity decreasing. we're about a year away from it being makarena. >> trying to get two sides come together to come to a deal on the fiscal cliff. >> i don't know about young people's abilities to force cats and dogs and democrats and republicans to come together to find a deal. he had a much more profound message than just simply dancing in that clip, in that psa essentially. he was trying to alert young people to the fact that old people, bluntly, are organized. look at the army of aarp representatives that ensure that programs like medicare and social security, programs that take up something like 50% of our federal budget will remain intac
balanced, responsible ways to reduce our deficit next week. we can reform our tax code next year. but we must give economic certainty to the middle class now, today. democrats agree, independents agree, and the majority of republicans agree, mr. president, and the american public agrees by a huge margin. even dozens of c.e.o.'s from major corporations whose personal taxes go up under our plan emphatically agree. the only people who aren't on board are republicans in congress. but now even they're crying out for compromise. i only hope my friend, john boehner, is listening. the presiding officer: the republican leader is recognized. mr. mcconnell: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican leader is recognized. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: yesterday afternoon came to the floor and offered president obama's proposal on the fiscal cliff to show t
the tax rate hike that he wanted, understand that we would continue to see trillion dollar deficits for as far as the eye can see. listen, washington has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. and if the president doesn't agree with our proposal, i believe he has an obligation to families and small businesses, to offer a plan of his own, a plan that can pass both chambers of the congress. we're ready and eager to talk to the president about such a plan. >> speaker, you spoke with the president earlier this week. can you characterize this call? if he called, did he have any kind of counteroffer? and also, we understand that he's just making clear that it's got to be increase in rates for the wealthy or no deal. are you willing to give a little bit, maybe just not all the way to 39.6? >> it was -- the phone call was pleasant but was just more of the same. the conversation that the staff had yesterday, just more of the same. it's time for the president, if he's serious, to come back to us with a counteroffer. >> mr. speaker, the jobs report today indicated unemployment is down roug
're running a trillion dollar deficit year single year. if we went back to zero, we're rebalanced. right now with the fourth year in a row, that deficit and debt continues to climb. so it doesn't really wipe it out and the challenge of it is what does that do to the overall economy. we're not just dealing with one tax increase as well. a lot of people lose track of that. the affordable care about actually begin on january 1st as well for people making $200,000 or more. or people having large medical bills. this is talking about an additional tax increase on top of that. >> what about what bill clinton said? he said once things start to get better and that's a crucial point he was making. once the economy starts to get better, taxes have to go up on the middle class. do you agree? is. >> i don't, actually. and the reason being is that right now, if you look at the real math, in 2007 and 012, we have the same amount of revenue. now, 2008 and 2009, we had a dramatic drop in federal revenues, but we've slowly climbed back up. revenue has gone up every year of the obama administration and now, we
it runs up the debt and deficit. >> the best thing for my children's future. i have two boys. one 10 years and one ten months and i'm worried about climate change and their future. we need to stop encouraging the industries that are causing this problem. the oil industry, gas and coal industries. and we need to start encouraging clean energy if we will solve it. the very first place to start is to stop giving these subsidies. it is a no-brainer. the vast majority of americans of all parties actually support this perspective. melissa: without affordable energy we have no economy and that is for sure bad for my children. we have no jobs. we have no industry. >> why is the fastest growing new source of energy in this country wind energy or distributed solar. melissa: because it is completely supported by the government and by my tax dollars. >> not even close to as much as --. melissa: absolutely no money to spend on these things you know what -- >> actually big oil, gas and coal are actually much more heavily subsidized. melissa: you and disagree what is subsidy is. that is fine for debate f
is that at a minimum, any deficit package has to include this immediate february and march debt ceiling that we're going to hit. >> is jack lew the current chief of staff and former budget director the top candidate to be treasury? what is your best guess? >> he appears to be the frontrunner from everything you see and read and hear and he is a -- i've known him a long time. he's an accomplished guy. he knows these issues perfectly. he has worked in the financial community and has a sense of that and vice versa. and so i think he would be a it terrific choice. >> we should say there are a couple other people who have been rumored to being vetted. roger altman, former treasury official, larry fink, be erskine bowles. this what is alan simpson, erskine bowles' partner in the deficit commission, had to say about that possibility last week on the show. >> he said he would be very pleased to do that. he shared that with me personally, as long as they move the treasury department to north carolina, to charlotte. i don't think -- >> he's worked so hard on this. you don't think he could be persuaded? >
adds so much to the federal budget deficit. so republicans say raise the retirement age to 67 or means testing, meaning making more wealthy americans pay more into the system or get less out of the system. if you means test, that means you're paying less out to affluent americans. if you raise the retirement age, you're paying out less as money comes in and keeping the revenue line closer to the cost line. that is the goal. so when you do a 10 or 20-year calculation, medicare is not adding to the deficit. but that's the policy and just as republicans are having a backlash against the speaker saying we don't think we should put tax increases on the table, the democrats and some of the new members in congress, they say they ran promising not to touch medicare. so they say they won't do this. so you have the credibility challenge. republicans say give us entitlement and other spending cuts and the democrats want higher tax rates. that's why we have a stalemate. >>> an internet icon wanted in connection with the killing of his neighbor. stay with us, you're in "the situation room." that of
of the entire group of government spending programs that are being looked at to get to deal with the deficits? >> well, before i answer that i was very interested in the way you characterized these programs as entitlements. so-called, you said, entitlements. and we think that a better term would be earned benefits. you know, i counted the letters in the word "entitlement." there are 11 letters. often people refer to entitlement as a four-letter word and it's a derogatory, derisive characterization. these are earned benefits. people pay for them while they're working, social security part "a" medicare, the hospital part. 25% of the premium for part "b." so i wish we would switch from entitlements to earned benefits, first of all. now answer your question, social security has not added a penny to the federal debt, to the deficits every year. it has a surplus. it has a surplus of $2.7 trillion. so why are we in such a rush to change a program that does not have -- is not bankrupt, has a surplus, has 22 years of solvency before it does have a serious problem and has not contributed to the federal
it's not 17% of our debt because right now we have a trillion dollar deficit every single year. if we went back to zero, that's true. right now with fourth year in a row with over a trillion dollars in deficit spending, that deficit and debt continues it to climb. it doesn't wipe it out. what does it do to the overall economy. we're not just dealing with one tax increase right now. the affordable care act actually begin on january 1st as well for people making $200,000 or more or people with large medical bills. that already starts coming up. this is an additional tax increase on top of that tax increase. >> what about what bill clinton said? he said once things start to get better, and that's a crucial point he was making. he wasn't saying doing it right away. once it gets better, taxes go up on the middle class. do you agree with that? >> i don't, actually. the reason being is that right now if you look at the real math on it, in 2007 and 2012 we have the same amount of revenue. obviously 2008 and '09 we had a dramatic drop in federal revenues coming in. we've slowly climbed back up
a plan not just to avert the fiscal cliff, but importantly to really tackle the deficit and debt problems in this country. i am concerned that deal won't be big enough. is it going to be small or medium or big. we need a plan big enough to fix the deficit problems and make sure the debt is no longer growing faster than the economy. we're not going to be able to balance the budget in the near future because the fiscal hole is so big. you want to make sure the debt is not growing faster than the economy. that's going to take $4 trillion in savings. you need all parts on the table and constructed in a thoughtful way so that revenues are raised in ways that are good for the economy as possible, and that when we're looking at the spending in the budget, we reform our entitlement programs and reduce spending in way that's thoughtful and good for the economy. it's going to take a lot to get there, but i actually think most of the policy ideas are well known and we're now in this political negotiation where i think there's a lot of support for having them, if they're going to go through all this,
to the white house press secretary says, look, the whole thing here is not about deficit reduction, listen. >> deficit reduction in and of itself is not the goal here. the reason to get our fiscal house in order. the reason to pass a deficit reduction package that is balanced and allows for economic growth and job creation is to put our economy on a sustainable fiscal path, which, then itself produces positive economic benefits and growth and jobs. >> okay. so here's the problem with that jay carney speaking for the president. speaking for the president, president obama, think back a couple years ago, in fact, it was october of 2008 when he was senator obama wanting to be president obama. he was concerned about the deficit and the debt. listen to what he had to say back then. >> the problem is the way bush has done it over the last 8 years is to take out a credit card from the bank of china in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion from the first 42 presidents, number 43 ed a $4 trillion by his lonesome so we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we're goi
low for middle-class families against the urgency of addressing our national budget deficits. by keeping tax rates low for 98% of americans and letting the tax rates go up very modestly for families earning over $250,000 a year, the democratic plan would cut the deficit by as much as a trillion dollars over the next decade. now, that alone doesn't cure our budget imbalance, but along with fair and sensible tax reforms and smart cuts in spending, it is part of the solution. let's be clear about one thing. the middle-class tax cut act would still benefit high-end taxpayers. families making over $250,000 a year would pay lower tax rates on their first $250,000. so if a family made $255,000, they'd only see an increase on the top $5,000 and then only to the clinton era rates that were in effect during the 1990's when, as we all recall, our economy was thriving. under the senate-passed plan, a family earning $255,000 a year would pay an extra 150 bucks in taxes. in opposing the middle-class tax cuts act, republicans claim that it would hurt the economy to raise tax rates on the to
to meet his target of eradicating the federal deficit by 2015 as well as securing a fall to gdp ratio. also expected further pressure with a cut to its growth forecast. steve is braving rather inclement british winter weather outside the houses of parliament. >> lovely. >> i know you like it. how much is it going to be raining on george osbourne's parade? >> it's going to rain on his parade. you just nailed it, ross. three things which are going to come up today, which he has very little control over. one is that obr reckoning on the uk economy. thought only back in march it was going to grow -- pain a negative growth for the year. next year they thought it was going to be 2% growth. it's probably only going to be 1%. in terms of those two targets you mentioned, eradicating the structural deficit in a five-year period, that's going to have another couple of years. >> right. now, there we go. you can see jim there in egypt. i wonder whether we should just go as we've decided to cut to him or maybe we can bring steve back. right. we'll try and reestablish steve. we will be going to jim
to reduce the deficit. jenna: interesting the president is saying he was speaking off the you have cuff, no teleprompter there. he's speaking about how he's rooting on american business. pointed to a couple of aspects much the economy, improvement in consumer confidence and housing as well. he was going to talk a little bit about the fiscal cliff and that's something we've all been talking about recently, and what it means for us right now and the year ahead. we also have other business news. we'll get back to the president by the way if and when we get that feedback. he will be taking questions from the audience there of business leaders as gregg mentioned. elizabeth mcdonald ever the fox business network is standing by list toning some of what the president had to say about the economy. liz, can you place it in context about where our economy is right now. >> reporter: the president just now was placing it in the -- the economy in the broader context of what is going on in the world, mentioning asia, mentioning europe, and then he turned to what was the most important part of the spee
trillion and due to expire in february without more deficit reduction. >> history shows that the only major deficit cutting deals we ever do around here ever comes after debates over the debt ceiling. it may be a good idea if you don't care about the debt, but it's a nonstarter for those of us who do. >> reporter: public opinion generally is on the president's side. house republicans are not paralyzed or powerless. in fact, they're more unifyied behind speaker boehner than they were on the debt crisis a year ago. why does this matter? the white house is noticing if there is a deal boehner can find the votes to pass it. >> thanks. we want to give you an idea of what's really at stake here. rebecca jarvis has a lock at how the government spends money and how it could spend less. rebecca, good morning. >> good morning. >> it comes up in terms of the money we're talking about in raising rates. how much is it that the republicans are objecting to? >> if you lock at that $250,000 number, if you were to raise taxes on everybody making $250,000 or more in this countr
they will not increase the debt ceiling now $16 trillion and due to expire in february without more deficit reduction. >> history shows the only major deficit cutting deals we ever do around here, ever, comes after debates over the debt ceiling. it may be a good idea if you don't care about the debt, but it's a non-starter for those of us who do. >> reporter: public opinion generally is on the president's side, but republicans in the house are not paralyzed or perilous, more unified behind speaker boehner than a year ago. why is this important? the white house is beginning to notice and now believe there is a deal boehner can find the stroets pass it. >> an idea what's really at stake. rebecca jarvis has a look how the government spends money and how it could spend less. rebec rebecca, good morning. >> reporter: good morning. >> the question comes up in terms of the money that we're talking about in raising the rate. how much is it that the republicans are objecting to? >> if you look at that $250,000 number, if you were to raise taxes on everybody making $250,000 or more in the country that would ra
deficit and debt. so this, this legislation both accomplishes that goal and still provides an increase in diversity which is what the senator from new york was talking about. and then an additional point is the point that the senator from texas so very clearly made. this legislation passed the house. last time i checked, legislation has to pass the senate and the house. that's a pretty important distinction. going back to the comments of the senator from kentucky. he said hey, if we can't do it all at once because of disagreements, let's start getting done what we can get done. so here is a bill that provides us with -- with people who can help our economy grow, people in the sciences and technology fields that we very much need. it will increase diversity just as the senator from new york said, and it's passed the house. common sense says let's go. let's pass the bill. so we very much want to join with the senator from new york and the senator from delaware and the other sponsors that he referred to, but let's join on something that can actually get done, meaning a bill that passes th
, in the end, the taxes are going up. we still have a trillion dollar deficit. this does not solve anything. at best, even if they raise the money they think they will, and i don't think they will raise any money, they are still left with a trillion dollar deficit. how are you going to bring down a trillion dollar deficit? i think the democrats are on -- i had to get that off my chest. stuart: gm car and truck sales are up 3%. the stock, dead flat. sales up 3%. that is the car sales numbers coming in today. steve, i want to get back to you here. the democrats say, wait a second, wait a second, you raise taxes on the rich just like the clinton did back in 1992 and you end up with a bill. you have a solid expansion. what do you make up with that argument? >> i hope they do not believe that argument. look, maybe barack obama is right. maybe if you raise these taxes, it will not hurt the economy. [talking over each other] stuart: bill clinton raised taxes and the economy took off. >> there are a lot of things that influence the economy. not just taxes. there are other things. there is no moneta
will go from 4.2 percent to 6.2 percent. $115billion a year that will go to deficit reduction instead of being pumped into the economy. those in favor of allowing the tax cut to expire argue money for social security payments has to come from somewhere. although he says that somewhere will mean doing without some of the basics. >> it might be a pair of sneakers. it might be the jacket they want to go to school with in the winter. >> the debate in washington is not about the federal budget it's about his family's. jim axle rod cbs news west new york new jersey. >> where in the world is john macafy. why he high tailed it to a luxury resort to try and clear his name. >>> plans to build a little dog park turned into an epic fight in one bay area city. (car horn) paying with your smartphone instead of cash... (phone rings) that's a step forward. with chase quickpay, you can send money directly to anyone's checking account. i guess he's a kicker... again, again! oh, no you don't! take a step forward and chase what matters. fire. and in this case, bushels of pot, as well. a two-alarm house f
're going to get revenues or get to the deficit number they want is to have both revenues and spending cuts. the only way to get the spending cuts and entitlements from the president they want is to give him some political revenues. >> when john boehner made his offer there were signatures of all the republican leaders on that letter, including cantor and paul ryan, viewed as a future presidential candidate among republicans. so by locking down those signatures on that $00 billion of new taxes, he's blocked those guys from opposing him. very savvy. >> did anybody phone some of the quemplets offer the budget committees? >> he did in order to demonstrate his power. gain bah boehner has been here a long time. he saw the coup attempt to speaker gingrich by members of his old party. he knows he has to hold those people together to negotiate with the president. he saw a little bit of wiggle room earlier with jim demint coming out earlier and said he thought the tax offer was an outrage. from the right you can see the speaker tamping that out with his boot. gwen: the president has not always been
's debt ceiling is clear. >> this is not about getting a handle on deficits or debt for him. it's about spending even more than he has. >> white house aids reject the republican claims that holding the debt limit over the president's head is the only mechanism to get him to trim spending. >> you're just going to keep at the debt limit goes higher, you spend more money. you and congress, both. >> that's false. president signed into law a trillion dollars in discretionary cuts. the president has a specific proposal to achieve $600 billion in savings from entitlement programs like health care entitlement programs. >> jay compared republican pressure on the debt ceiling to a hostage taking. >> a profoundly bad idea that i think could not be more frightening for american businesses, and american workers. >> treasury secretary tim geithner may have frightened people yesterday saying the white house is prepared to go off the fiscal cliff unless republicans bend on taxes. a comment by former democratic potential candidate howard deen frightened republicans that the debate is not just about rais
is preposterous when you're running trillion dollar deficit. and just to add insult, and here's the insult, he demands congress give up the power to control the deficit. that's obviously meanlt to humiliate the republicans. it's a non-starter. it's not acceptable. it's a way of saying to boehner you want to hand me your sword, you want to hand me your shirt? i want your trousers as well. the white house is not budging, and everybody's waiting, meaning the media, the administration are waiting for republicans to cave. >> look. i agree totally with you and their posture, their public posture appears that they're going that way. i'll give you a quick example. when john boehner started to answer the other day and he said well, our plan is to raise revenues on the rich, he was co opting barack obama's language and we read this week about the purging and the removal of conservatives and tea party members from their committee assignments because they didn't vote the way speaker boehner wants. that seems to me to be evidence that a surrender is coming. >> well, i'm not sure it's the appointments so mu
of how we fix our national deficit. as you well know, we face the fiscal cliff, a series of tax hikes and spending cuts that many people think if they go into effect will put the country into recession. yet we heard the treasury secretary tim geithner say the president is willing to see the country go off the fiscal cliff if republicans do not accede to his demands. >> it's probably pretty real. but you can't get to where we need to go by cutting spending, that won't cut it. you're going to destroy a fragile economy. you can't get there by taxing your way into it and you can't grow your way out of this. you have to have a blend. when you have leaders of parties and people from the administration saying i think it will be to the advantage of the democrats to go off the cliff or i think it will be advantage to the republicans to go off the cliff or the president to go off the cliff, that's like betting your country. there's stupidity involved in that. this is big-time stuff. >> let me ask you about a report that some republicans now are perhaps willing to see the tax rates rise to some
're serious about reducing our deficit while still investing in things like education and research that are important to growing our economy, and if we're serious about protecting middle-class families, then we're also going to have to ask the wealthiest americans to pay higher tax rates. that's one principle i won't compromise on. >> meanwhile, on the other side of the aisle, republican senator marco rubio gave the weekly republican address today. part of his message? the tax rate should not go up on anyone including the top 2%. >> we must reform our complicated, uncertain, job-killing tax code by getting rid of unjustified loopholes. but our goal should be to generate new revenue by creating new taxpayers, not new taxes. >> joining me, author of "the escape artists: how obama's team fumbled the recovery." david nakamura is with us, as well, from "the washington post." good to see you. what's your read on this, first of all, both sides publicly giving the impression they are sticking to their guns? >> yeah. i think in the past week you've seen some movement in the gop, some acknow
, not just to avoid the damage of the sequester but to help reduce our long-term deficit. >> i was disappointed by the president's proposal. i think it is essentially a rerun of his budget proposal. the revenue proposals are $1.6 trillion in revenue and tax increases. it's a massive tax increase. but also not significant and meaningful in entitlement reforms. >> so, anna, i hear comments like those and remarks by john boehner and the president of the united states and i wonder after the election, did we learn anything? because i -- my reading on the election was that the people, the voters wanted compromise. and for the people in washington to talk to each other not at each other. that still appears to be what they're doing, no? >> i think right after the election that was the message that even president obama and john boehner and the entire leadership, we saw that incredible image of the minority and majority leaders on both houses come out saying things that sounded like they were going to cooperate. but, you know, only in washington can that mean nothing quickly. but i do th
know, one thing is we take a huge bite out of the deficit. we do it in a crude may, and there would be immediate attempts to fix it and fine-tune it and take some back. some would probably get through. if you actually want to look at it from a policy standpoint, it may not be the worst possible option to just go over the cliff and then put back in the tax cuts and the spending increases or renewals that you'd like to put back in. so, you know, worst things could happen. >> well, listen, alan simpson and i go back to his sound from the "today" show, eugene. he said anyone talking about it in that way, there's stupidity involved. he didn't say, eugene, you better not because you're my buddy, but the reality is even our first read team says this notion or all of this media hype about going off the cliff from some of our colleagues is overstated. to their point a deal is in sight, that's why boehner and the president spoke yesterday. it's a matter of how big. will they separate the tax cuts from a larger needed plan later down the road? i guess what you folks in d.c. like to call "kicki
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 95 (some duplicates have been removed)